Memory Alpha:Pages for deletion
Leslie Shatner ;Leslie Shatner * Unlike Melanie and Lisabeth, Leslie did not appear in any episodes of Star Trek, so her entry here should be treated the same. What useful references there are, should be added to the William, Lisabeth, Melanie, Lemli, Leslie and corresponding episode pages that they first identified in and that's about it. --Alan del Beccio 06:23, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC) **Anyone? --Alan del Beccio 08:11, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC) *Ok, delete --Memory 19:37, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC) *There's a part of me that says "We have Melanie and Lis, so taking away Leslie isn't exactly fair." But then there's another part of me that says, "No Trek appearances?! Blasphemy! Get rid of her!" So, having argued the point briefly in my mind I will have to say Delete. --From Andoria with Love 12:17, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) *'Delete'. Coke 21:06, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) *'Delete'. AJHalliwell 22:02, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) Element with no Trek relevance *Radium No Trek relevance, I recommend that the page's content be merged with Johnsonium and deleted. --Defiant | ''Talk'' 23:06, 5 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Comment: I really don't care if these are kept one way or another. On the one hand, the symbol was used, but with another element. On the other, as you said, there is absolutely no trek relevance (the info is already pretty much on the Johnsonium article, albeit not the atomic number. If Radium, is going to go then I suggest deleting similar articles: **Thulium **Mendelevium (created before the element revamp) **Bismuth **Barium **Bromine **Cesium **Einsteinium **Francium **Polonium *--Tim Thomason 23:14, 5 Oct 2005 (UTC) *'Delete' --Memory 19:37, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC) *'Delete', although we I think "Cesium" may have, so I'll check that, and "Einsteinium" is a real element? I'd've guessed it was from the "Rascals" chart. I wonder if it was named after anyone. - AJHalliwell 22:02, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) **'Comment': Actually, as stated above, the symbols for Cesium and Einsteinium were used for Cosmoium and Estonianium respectively on the "Rascals" chart. Cs was also incorrectly used once for hydrogen. Thulium's (Tm) symbol was used for Purseronite, Mendelevium's (Md) for Hawkeye, Bismuth's (Bi) for Thomsonian, Barium's (Ba) for Babaloo, Bromine's (Br) for Yacobian, Brownfieldium and Bermanium, Francium's (Fr) for Franconium and Freedonia, and Polonium's (Po) for Poi.--Tim Thomason 00:26, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC) Transcendence ;Transcendence * MA does not catalog articles about unlicensed or illegally published fan-fiction material. The only company ever licensed to publish original, non-reprinted Trek fiction in the past ten years has been Pocket Books and they did not publish a novel of this name, by this author, in any of their series. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 23:46, 11 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Keep. There's a poster who explained the whole thing on the talk page. There's no reason to be so delete-happy. This is why people are afraid to post things. - User:Keras (added by Alan del Beccio; Please sign your posts when leaving comments.) ** Comment, this is the first I've heard of "people" being afraid to post things here. Is there a chat forum somewhere on the web that is covering this? To reply to your comment: people are so "delete-happy" here because people start vague pages that other people cannot confirm as legitimate or canon and rather than letting the questionable page marinate for weeks on end unnoticed, it gets posted here -- forcing people to either fix it or trash it. It is, by far, the best way to expose questionable content to a trial by jury, otherwise known as "taking action" or "housekeeping." Obviously there has been a lot of "talk" on the talk page about it, and somebody evidently has the book, but the fact of the matter is -- no one has made any effort beyond "talking" to actually correct the page to prove to the community that it is indeed legitimate in one form or another. However, if indeed what Mike said in the talk page is true and this is an "unlicensed or illegally published fan-fiction material" then it shouldn't be here. That much is clear in our charter of what we currently deem as acceptable content for this website. --Alan del Beccio 00:48, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC) ***Actually, you're right about one thing; I've spent so much time arguing that I haven't actually fixed the post. Well, that ends now. I'm going to dig out my copy of the book and fix the page, because you're absolutly right, I should be doing that instead of trying to get other people to do it. I'll do what I can for now, and finish fixing it over the next day or so. However, if I'm going to go to the effort of fixing it, at least take it off the deletion list. -Keras ****"Pages listed here will be removed after 5 days, unless voted otherwise." --Alan del Beccio 07:26, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC) *****Well, one vote for and one against. Where does that leave us? ******Since you can't vote in this section (according to policy: user "has been in existence at least one week before the listing", unless you are the original author which you apparently are not), this leaves us with only votes for deletion. I'm reserving my own vote for the moment, but unless you can give us something like an ISBN number (as was requested somewhere), I can't see a good reason to keep. -- Cid Highwind 20:41, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Hm, illegally published, interesting. The strict deletion policy is what keeps MA running so smoothly, why would someone be afraid to post something if the can cite it and it's not already here? Don't take it offensively if other users wikify or fix the grammar of an article you write, teamwork is the point of a wiki. Delete. Although (I don't know if wiki allows ST novel pages) this should be on the Internet somewhere, it's an interesting story. (the copyright infringement, not the actual novel's plot line) - AJHalliwell 22:02, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) To be fair, it was legally published and then there was a contract dispute that made it illegal and got it pulled. 216.179.97.10 23:22, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) * If that is the case, then it should have a ISBN in whatever edition was originally released prior to the dispute. --Alan del Beccio 00:22, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC) ::Have you ever tried to find an ISBN for a book that's not out anymore? It's not easy, but I'm tryingKeras 01:02, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC) ::: And what I am saying is that whoever has this information, either an original version of the book, or some other verifable source on these various claims about contract disputes this and book retractions that must be able to prove an ISBN or again, a link or source backing up all these claims about this novel. --Alan del Beccio 01:32, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC) Igi Yamora ;Igi Yamora : No sources, and I've never heard of this guy. This is apparently taken from the Trekmania Chronology, an"Unofficial Timeline of Space Travel and Starfleet", meaning it's non-canon. --From Andoria with Love 11:03, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Delete -- non-canon (like I really need to lk to the word ;). -Alan del Beccio 16:59, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Delete - AJHalliwell 22:02, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) Disambiguation Pages These pages only link to two pages and as such are not needed (a small disambig note is sufficient). Once deleted one of the two (most popular/first/most likely to be looked-for) could be moved to the spot, with a disambig note on top of course. * Angel One * Argo * Ashes of Eden * Avenger * Brig (disambiguation) * Carstairs * Central Command * Chandra * Class F * Columbia * Columbus * Comic * Copernicus Added after Gvsualan's vote: * Cousteau * Crossover (disambiguation) * Dara * Deela * dollar * Duras * Eddie * Electromagnetic life-form * Epsilon IX * Federation-Klingon War * Fisher * Garrovick * Ghost (disambiguation) * Gleason * Goddard * Gral * Harris * Hawking * Hawkins * Henley * Herbert (disambiguation) * Hypersonic * ISS Enterprise * Justman * Kahless * Kara * Kellin * Kelso * Kir * Kirby * Klag * Kolos * Koral * Krim * Kyoto * Lal (disambiguation) * Larg * Latia * Lindstrom * Loomis (disambiguation) * Malvin * Martinez (disambiguation) * Mavek * The Menagerie * Mercury * Wendy Neuss (Captain) * North Star (disambiguation) * Old Ones * Ops * Parker * Piper (disambiguation) * Porter * Probert * Quarren * Rakal * Rand * Rigelian freighter * Rogers * Romulan Bird-of-Prey * Rules of Acquisition * SCE * Solok This information was added after my comment below: * Star Trek: Invasion * Star Trek: Voyager (comic) * Stiles * Strickler * Surak class * Sylvia * T'Paal * T'Plana-Hath * Tanis * The Tempest * Terra Prime * Tiburon * Toran (Gul) * Tos * Tsunkatse (disambiguation) * Type-4 * Tyree * Vico * The Void * Vrax * Weiss * Yates About half-way through making this I realized some of the problems inherent in deleting all of these without checking, so if any admin deletes these they should check the page first (they have to anyway).--Tim Thomason 19:36, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) (finished 21:42, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)) * Keep some, delete others...: I disagree with a majority of these, as who is to decide which gets the main entry and who gets second prize, when there is two equally referenced terms, like Argo, as they were both heavily referenced terms in their respective episode/movie(s). Or for that matter, when someone searches for Central Command, the first page that comes up should be the disambiguation link to inform them that there is more than one "Central Command", or more than one reference to pretty much everything else that otherwise requires a qualifier. Class F needs to stay because it was created to replace the sorta canon, but not referenced on TV planetary class designation. Bennett and Bennet are necessary to differientiate two different individuals ... as again, who is to decide which gets the main entry and who gets second prize? --Alan del Beccio 21:03, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) **'Comment': I should have been more descriptive. All of the disambigs have only two people mentioned, and a disambig note at the top of each of the pages (for most, some that link together already aren't needed) would be suffice. If someone was to search for "Central Command" they would get the search results which show both in the "Article title matches" section. I'm just trying to revamp the disambiguations, which some have had problems with lately.--Tim Thomason 21:18, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) *** Again, most of these two people mentioned disambiguations are exactly why we have disambiguation pages. In most all the the cases presented, there is no single name that supercedes the other, so the establishment of disambiguation page is necessary to 'define that difference in a structured atmosphere (article) to terms that are otherwise unstructured when relying on "Article title matches". --Alan del Beccio 22:01, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) ****You're right, I've been a little overzealous about the whole "fixing disambigs" thing lately. And I hate to have people repeat things to me (I like to think I'm smarter than that). I've tried taking away some of the articles you worked on. I still think a good majority of the above articles are still unneeded, but I guess that should be tken on a case-to-case basis. One question though, should the articles link to the disambig (if there are only two articles on the disambig) or should they link to the corresponding article? I've seen both done, and think they should link to there corresponding article.--Tim Thomason 22:22, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC) *****I think, to defend your "there are only two articles", that linking one to the other in the actual page (see what I recently did with Chandra (Captain) and Chandra (Wadi)) makes sense, with the disambig page linked only to the "list of disambig pages". As for individuals with 3 or more similar names, they should contain links to the disambig page (as I did with Brand), rather than creating a long list of "see also's" at the top of the page. Most of this can be interpreted from Memory Alpha: Disambiguation -- in terms of not making the disambig page an orphan, but not sending a reader to the disambig page when there is only one other name linked on it that could otherwise be listed on the only other article page with a shared name. --Alan del Beccio 22:41, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)